Outcome of patients after endoluminal stent placement for benign colorectal obstruction

Endoscopic decompression of benign large bowel obstruction using a transanal drainage tube

AIM

Endoscopic decompression of malignant colorectal obstruction is often dealt with using expandable metallic stents. Endoscopic decompression of benign large bowel obstruction is more difficult. We report the technique and outcome of transanal endoscopic decompression for benign large bowel obstruction.

METHOD

From January 2001 to June 2010, endoscopic decompression using a transanal drainage tube placement was attempted in consecutive patients with benign large bowel obstruction. The clinical features, technical success, complications, treatment after the tube placement and clinical success were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 13 patients (seven males, age 47-87, mean 69 years). The sites of obstruction were transverse colon [5 (38%)], sigmoid colon [3 (23%)], ileocecal valve [2 (15%)], splenic flexure [1 (8%)], descending colon [1 (8%)] and rectum [1 (8%)]. The most common cause of obstruction was anastomotic stricture [9 (69%)]. In 12 (92%) patients transanal decompression was technically successful with one perforation. An overtube, the reinsertion of colonoscope along the decompression tube, or the use of a small-diameter endoscope was required for the tube placement in seven (54%). In seven (54%) patients tube placement alone resulted in relief of bowel obstruction without operation.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic decompression using a transanal drainage tube is effective for the management of benign large bowel obstruction.

Endoprosthetic management of refractory ileocolonic anastomotic strictures after resection for Crohn's disease: report of nine-year follow-up and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The role of endoluminal stenting in benign obstruction, especially for Crohn's disease (CD), is controversial, with limited data and widely disparate outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of this technology in the treatment of fibrostenotic CD and to review the existing literature on this topic.

METHODS

We undertook a retrospective review of all patients undergoing endoluminal stenting for CD strictures at our institution from 2001 to 2010. Outcome measures included technical success, clinical improvement, duration of stent and luminal patency, and need for re-intervention.

RESULTS

Five patients underwent this procedure with a 100% rate of technical and an 80% rate of clinical success. Mean follow-up was 28 months (range 3 weeks to 109 months) and mean long-term luminal patency was 34.8 months (range 4.5-109 months). There was one complication involving reobstruction which required surgical intervention and no mortalities.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoluminal stenting of CD strictures is a safe and effective alternative to surgery which can provide lasting benefit in select patients. Further studies are necessary to clarify the full impact of this technology on long-term management of this complex disease.

[Endoscopic management of luminal stenosis in inflammatory bowel disease]

Luminal stenosis is frequent in Crohn's disease (CD) due to transmural involvement. Before any endoscopic treatment, the presence of neoplastic stenosis should always be excluded. Endoscopic balloon dilatation has been used in several series to treat benign stenosis, mainly in CD with involvement of the distal ileon, colon or surgical anastomosis, with success rates of 51% to 85%, although recurrence is high. The concomitant use of injected steroids (triamcinolone) after endoscopic dilatation produces longer-lasting results, but there are few published reports. In patients with luminal stenosis refractory to conventional endoscopy, three emerging techniques may be useful: self-expanding metallic stents, biodegradable endoprostheses and intralesional infliximab injection.

Stenting for malignant colorectal obstruction: a single-center experience with 101 patients

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are used for colorectal obstruction preoperatively and palliatively. Limited data on the use of stents for obstruction caused by extracolonic malignancies exist, and the results are unclear. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SEMS for patients stented as a bridge to surgery and as palliation for colorectal cancer or extracolonic malignancies.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2009, a total of 101 patients underwent 108 stenting procedures for malignant colorectal obstruction. The results were studied retrospectively.

RESULTS

Of the study cohort, 11 patients were stented as a bridge to surgery. For palliatively stented patients, the etiology of obstruction was colorectal cancer in 66 patients and extracolonic malignancy in 24. Overall technical success was 99% and clinical success 88%. Complications occurred for 20 (20%) patients in 22 of 108 procedures. Complications included perforation (n = 6), recurrent obstruction (n = 8), and stent migration (n = 4). A median time to complication was 81.5 days. The overall stent placement-related mortality was 2/101 (2%). For patients stented as a bridge to surgery, a primary anastomosis in elective operations was achieved for 90% (9/10). In the palliation groups, patients with colorectal cancer had significantly higher clinical success rates than patients with extracolonic malignancies (94% vs. 65%, P = 0.0005). There was no difference in complications, operation, and stoma rates between the palliation groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a safe and effective treatment for patients stented as a bridge to surgery or as palliation due to colorectal cancer. Stents are also useful in relieving obstruction due to extracolonic malignancies, but the clinical failure rate is higher than for colorectal cancer.

Enteral stents

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

Diverticular disease: epidemiology and management

Diverticular disease of the colon is among the most prevalent conditions in western society and is among the leading reasons for outpatient visits and causes of hospitalization. While previously considered to be a disease primarily affecting the elderly, there is increasing incidence among individuals younger than 40 years of age. Diverticular disease most frequently presents as uncomplicated diverticulitis, and the cornerstone of management is antibiotic therapy and bowel rest. Segmental colitis associated with diverticula shares common histopathological features with inflammatory bowel disease and may benefit from treatment with 5-aminosalicylates. Surgical management may be required for patients with recurrent diverticulitis or one of its complications including peridiverticular abscess, perforation, fistulizing disease, and strictures and ⁄ or obstruction.

Endoscopic fixation of the rectum for rectal prolapse: a feasibility and survival experimental study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been considerable interest in developing technology as well as techniques that could widen the therapeutic horizons of endoscopy. Rectal prolapse, a benign localized condition causing considerable morbidity, could be an excellent focus for new endoscopic therapies. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of endoluminal fixation of the rectum to the anterior abdominal wall, after pushing it up inside the body, using an in vivo animal model.

METHODS

We performed an in vivo comparative surgical study in a porcine model, including laparoscopic mobilization of the rectum and posterior rectopexy (standard surgical method) or endoluminal tacking of the rectum. After proving feasibility in ex vivo and acute studies, we performed a survival study to evaluate the safety of endoluminal tacking of the mobilized rectum to the anterior abdominal wall. The main outcome measures were successful completion of the tasks, maintenance of the fixation, complications associated with the methods, and survival studies including histopathological examinations of the fixation sites.

RESULTS

There were two groups: laparoscopic rectopexy (8 animals) and endoluminal fixation of the rectum to the anterior abdominal wall (10 animals). There were no differences between these two groups in their postoperative recovery. The group with the endoluminal fixation was found to have adequate attachment of the rectum to the anterior abdominal wall (measured attachment pressure in the endoluminal group = 6.06 ± 0.52 ft-lb, in the control group = 4.86 ± 2.00 ft-lb) on both gross and microscopic evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic fixation of the mobilized rectum is feasible and safe in this model and in the future may provide an effective alternative to current treatment options for rectal prolapse.

Long-term success of colonic stent insertion is influenced by indication but not by length of stent or site of obstruction

INTRODUCTION

Stent insertion plays an important part in the management of acute colonic obstruction. There are limited data on factors influencing short- and long-term success.

AIMS AND METHODS

We investigated indications, technical and clinical success rates, complication rates and the factors influencing them. Patients were identified from our prospective colonic stent database (2000-2008).

RESULTS

One hundred and four stents were attempted in 96 patients (technical success rate, 83.3%). Clinical short-term success was observed in 74 (77.1%) patients. Follow-up data available for 57 patients showed clinical long-term success in 77% (44/57). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed a significant decline in technical success over the study period (p = 0.041). Patients with colonic malignancy had significantly higher long-term success rates (81%), compared to those with extra-colonic malignancies (43%) (p = 0.049). Length of stent and site of obstruction were not significant factors. Early complications occurred in 10%, and late complications, in 26.3% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Colonic stent insertion provides symptom relief in over 70% when used as a long-term solution. Complication rates are high, and a significant minority of patients requires re-intervention. Obstruction caused by extra-colonic malignancy is far less likely to be permanently palliated by a stent, in comparison to colonic malignancy.

Colonic stents: the modern treatment of colonic obstruction

Colonic stents traditionally have been used for the management of colorectal cancer, either as a palliative treatment or as a bridge to surgery. More recently, colonic stents have also been advocated as part of the therapy of benign strictures. A number of colonic stents are available worldwide, four of which are made in the USA. These stents are classified as covered or uncovered, with similar clinical applications. Technical and clinical success rates are similar among these different stents, as well as the rate of complications, which mainly consist of obstruction and migration. The deployment systems utilize fluoroscopy, endoscopy, or both. More recently, stents became available that are deployed "through the scope" (TTS) making the procedure faster. However, this advance does not exclude the use of fluoroscopy, particularly in those cases where the direct visualization of the proximal end of the stricture is absent. The increasing experience in the management of colorectal cancer with colonic stents decreases the morbidity and mortality, as well as cost, in comparison with surgical intervention for acute colonic obstruction. Management with colonic stents can also rule out proximal synchronous lesions after initial decompression prior to definitive surgery. Benign conditions may also be treated with stents. A multidisciplinary approach for the use of colonic stents during assessment and management of acute colonic obstruction is necessary in order to achieve a satisfactory outcome, whether that be better quality of life or improved survival.

Update on the indications and use of colonic stents

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is a minimally invasive option for achieving acute colonic decompression in obstructed colorectal cancer. Colorectal stenting offers nonoperative, immediate, and effective colon decompression and allows bowel preparation for an elective oncologic resection. Patients who benefit the most are high-risk surgical patients and candidates for laparoscopic resection with complete obstruction, because emergency surgery can be avoided in more than 90% of patients. Colonic stent placement also offers effective palliation of malignant colonic obstruction, although it carries risks of delayed complications. When performed by experienced endoscopists, the technical success rate is high with a low procedural complication rate. Despite concerns of tumor seeding following endoscopic colorectal stent placement, no difference exists in oncologic long-term survival between patients who undergo stent placement followed by elective resection and those undergoing emergency bowel resection. Colorectal stents have also been used in selected patients with benign colonic strictures. Uncovered metal stents should be avoided in these patients, and fully covered stents are associated with high risk of migration. Patients with benign colonic stricture with acute colonic obstruction who are at high risk for emergency surgery can gain temporary relief of obstruction after SEMS placement; the stent can be removed en bloc with the colon specimen at surgery. This article reviews the techniques and indications of SEMS placement for benign and malignant colorectal obstructions.